export_node_as_image

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose behavioral aspects such as whether the export is read-only, what happens to the node, or the format of the output (e.g., file download vs. URL). This lack of detail reduces transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence that is concise and contains no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action, though it could be slightly more informative.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description lacks details about the return value, such as whether it returns image data or a URL. Given the absence of an output schema and the tool's complexity (multiple format options, scale), the description is incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters (nodeId, scale, format). The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not improve comprehension.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Export' and resource 'node' with output 'image from Figma', effectively distinguishing it from siblings like clone_node or create_gif. However, it adds little beyond the tool's name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusion criteria. The description provides no context for appropriate usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.